SPECIALIZED DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE COURT SYSTEMS
Establishing specialized courts or
court processes for domestic violence cases is another way to increase the
judiciary’s responsiveness to domestic violence. Levels of specialization
vary widely in those jurisdictions that have adopted this approach. Some jurisdictions
have created courts that handle only domestic violence cases; others have
altered court processes to ensure more effective processing of domestic violence
matters; yet others have specialized staff that provide support to victims.
Dedicating part of the court system to domestic violence issues sends a message
to the community that violence will not be tolerated.
Dedicated Courts and Prosecutors
Some jurisdictions in the United States
have created courts (often called dedicated courts) that handle all criminal
and civil cases involving domestic violence. Other jurisdictions have
created
courts that handle all criminal domestic violence cases, or all misdemeanors.
Other court systems have created dedicated teams of prosecutors that work
only on domestic violence prosecutions. The importance of the role played
by prosecutors, particularly
in CEE/CIS, cannot be overstated.
Dedicated courts and prosecution teams
can have many advantages. Because all domestic violence cases are dealt with
by the same group of judges or prosecutors, these individuals are able to
gain expertise in the issues and to ensure more consistency in the treatment
of these cases. They will be more sensitive to the needs of victims and be
able to direct them to additional community resources. Dedicated courts or
prosecution teams may also be able to process cases more quickly, thus reducing
the opportunity a batterer has to intimidate his partner into abandoning the
charges.
Judges and prosecutors who consistently
deal with domestic violence cases may see repeat offenders; having a more
detailed background about the case may help them be more sensitive to the
needs of the victim. Correspondingly, the fact that fewer individuals will
deal with these cases can help deter future violence because offenders will
expect increasing penalties and greater accountability. Offenders will know
that if they batter again, they are likely to end up before the same judge
or with the same prosecutor, where they will be less able to minimize or deny
the violence.
Others argue that judges who sit on
specialized courts may be, or may appear to be, less impartial because of
their expertise and knowledge about the history of a repeat offender. Opponents
also argue that consistency can be a disadvantage; a consistently unresponsive
court or prosecutor will be worse than a system that is only sporadically
so. A specialized court may also require more security personnel because of
the danger that abusers will use the opportunity provided by the court appearance
to abuse, coerce, intimidate or harm their partners. Domestic violence cases
are also difficult; those who work solely on these kinds of cases may experience
burnout more quickly than others.
Finally, dedicated courts and prosecution
teams may run the risk of being marginalized. Singling out one court or team
of prosecutors to handle domestic violence issues may generate an understanding
of that entity as one that deals with “family” as opposed to “real” crimes,
thus undermining efforts to gain recognition of domestic violence as a crime
and relegating domestic violence to the realm of the family. From Julia
Weber, Domestic Violence Courts: Components and Considerations, 2 Journal
of the Center for Families, Children & The Courts 23, 29 (2000). Billie
Lee Dunford-Jackson et al., Unified Family Courts: How Will They Serve Victims
of Domestic Violence? 7.
Similarly, opponents have voiced concern
that the existence of one entity with domestic violence expertise will result
in other judges and prosecutors feeling absolved of responsibility to be sensitive
to domestic violence issues, even though not all domestic violence cases will
be identified as such and may make their way in whole or in part through the
general system. From Dag MacLeod & Julia F. Weber, Domestic
Violence Courts: A Descriptive Study (2000).
The usefulness of combining civil
and criminal jurisdiction in one court has also been debated. Advocates of
such an approach argue that combined courts allow victims to obtain all of
the relief they need at once and in one place. Allowing victims to testify
for the prosecution and obtain child support in one proceeding, for example,
can greatly enhance the accessibility of the court; it can be difficult for
women to get time off from work, to travel, or to find child care in order
to make multiple appearances. Judges who hear both the civil and the criminal
sides of a case develop extensive expertise about domestic violence issues
and are better informed about the case. Finally, combining courts can ensure
that civil and criminal orders do not conflict.
There are, however, a number of arguments
that counsel against combined courts. Depending on the legal system, there
may be defendant’s rights issues connected with the use of information from
one proceeding in another matter. Opponents also argue that judges or prosecutors
in combined courts may bargain away criminal penalties in exchange for the
defendant’s cooperation in civil proceedings (i.e., an agreement about
custody or child support). Finally, opponents worry that victims will be
required
to cooperate with criminal prosecutions in order to gain civil relief, a
requirement that raises the same autonomy concerns generated by mandatory
prosecution.
Adapted from Julia Weber, Domestic
Violence Courts: Components and Considerations, 2 Journal of the Center for
Families, Children & The Courts 23, 29 (2000). Billie Lee Dunford-Jackson
et al., Unified Family Courts: How Will They Serve Victims of Domestic
Violence?
7; Dag MacLeod & Julia F. Weber, Domestic
Violence Courts: A Descriptive Study
(2000).
Dedicated Processing
Some jurisdictions have altered the
internal administrative processes of their courts in order to ensure that
domestic violence cases are handled in a way that maximizes victim safety
and batterer accountability. For example, many courts are scheduling and processing
domestic violence matters (i.e., hearings on protective orders, pretrial conferences)
separately from other matters. This ensures that cases are processed quickly,
which can be critical. As time passes, the chance a victim will abandon the
case increases; she may be in danger of losing her job because of the time
she must to miss for court appearances, feel frustrated with the process or
with having to repeat her story multiple times, or experience intimidation
from her batterer.
Other courts have changed the way
they collect and track information about cases to better respond to the needs
of victims and ensure that batterers are consistently being accountable.
Many
recent efforts use web-based technology to share information about offenders
between different courts and between probation services and the courts.
This
technology makes it possible to identify domestic violence cases, cases involving
the same defendant, or related cases (one couple may be involved in multiple
proceedings concerning child custody, protective orders, and criminal charges).
New York State, for example, has developed the Domestic
Violence Court Technology
Application and Resource Link,
a software application that uses internet technology to connect domestic
violence courts with law enforcement and social service providers. This
program
Information sharing systems must,
however, be paired with privacy and confidentiality protocols. These protocols
should identify those who may access information, what information may be
accessed, and the circumstances under which that can happen; this protocol
can be translated into security measures that prevent unauthorized access.
Dedicated Resources
Other courts have a created specialized
processes to ensure women seeking relief from violence are provided the support
they need. Some courts have specialized support units (called intake units,
case managers, or resource coordinators) that, among other things, may help
women file for civil protection orders, provide women with referrals to community
resources, screen for cases involving domestic violence, ensure that information
about related cases is shared throughout the system, and coordinate scheduling
of related matters. Other courts have witness assistants who accompany the
victim to court and often are able to provide the court and the prosecutor
with additional background about the case and the history of abuse that may
not be evident from the record.
The support unit can be part of or
independent of the court. The District of Columbia’s support unit, for example,
was created through cooperation between a public agency, a private enterprise,
and a victim advocacy organization. It is critical that the victim is informed
about the relationship between the court and support unit or witness assistant.
If support staff are employees of the court, they may not be able to guarantee
that the information she shares will remain confidential.
Courts can adopt one or more of these
features. New
York State,
for example, has chosen a combination approach that includes a dedicated
court that hears all criminal domestic violence cases, a resource coordinator,
an
offender monitor (a staff person that follows defendants post-conviction
to ensure they are complying with the terms of their sentence), and a
victim
advocate (similar to a witness assistant).
Adapted from Randal B. Fritzler
& Leonore M.J. Simon, Creating a Domestic Violence Court: Combat in the
Trenches, Court Review 28 (2000); Lynn S. Levey, Martha Wade Steketee &
Susan L. Keilitz, Lessons Learned in Implementing an Integrated Domestic
Violence Court: The District of Columbia Experience 16 (2000); Julia
Weber, Domestic
Violence Courts: Components and Considerations, 2 Journal of the Center
for Families, Children & The Courts 23, 29 (2000); Judge Amy Karan,
Susan Keilitz & Sharon Denaro, Domestic Violence Courts: What Are
They and How Should We Manage Them?, Juvenile & Family Court Journal
2 (1999); Billie Lee Dunford-Jackson et al., Unified Family Courts:
How Will They Serve Victims
of Domestic Violence?; Julie A. Helling, Specialized
Criminal Domestic Violence Courts.